Brownson may be right in saying that Archbishop John Ireland was not the prompter to William J. Onahan in demanding a new program; but he used Ireland's name so much Foy assumed this to be so. Brownson should write to Ireland, and show him that an advisory committee of bishops would be unwise and impolitic. He is not well pleased with the conduct of their German friend Henry J. Spaunhorst, he declaimed temperance in Detroit, and in St. Louis he threw up the sponge without a struggle; he has been inconsistent before. He talked with Father J.J. Hughes who is of their mind on a supervisory body; Hughes said such a body should be severely limited to actions contrary to faith and morals. He further agreed with Brownson's stand and thought they should have a theologian on the committee. Foy is in favor of one committee and of forwarding the idea of a permanent organization and of holding annual or biennial meetings. He does not think Terence V. Powderly the man to write a paper on capital and labor because he is so completely identified with one side; he might do for the temperance paper, a subject on which the working classes cannot get too much wholesome counsel. Since the St. Louis Archbishop is to say the Mass at the Carroll centenary they will have a large contingent present. Instead of Brownson coming to St. Louis, the committee should go early to Baltimore before the congress. Onahan says he will not have time to write a paper; when the mayor is out of town, Onahan must be at his desk. Onahan objected strongly to Montgomery writing a paper. :: III-3-c A.L.S. 11pp. 12mo.